Author
Topic: Post Trial Motions, 8/8/13 (Read 18613 times)

MOTION TO AMEND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND REINSTATE THIS ACTIONAND TRANSFER THE ACTION TO THE MIAMI DADE DISTRICT COURT HOUSEFOR REHEARING OF PROBABLE CAUSE ARGUMENT AGAINST GEORGE ZIMMERMAN

MOTION REINSTATE AND CONTINUANCE AGAINST ABOVE NAME DEFENDANT GEORGEMICHAEL ZIMMERMAN ON BASIS OF NEW ARGUMENT ALL IN COMPLIANCE TO THERULES OF DISTRICT COURT CREDIBLE ARGUMENT WITH PERMISSION TO ADVISEMENTFAMILY

Somebody help me with these.

More frivolous attempts at double jeopardy?

I'm thinking the first might be GZ at last taking some kind of action against the state over the Probable Cause Affidavit. But why Miami? The phrase 'reinstate this action' also seems more consistent with the first hypothesis.

I'm thinking the first might be GZ at last taking some kind of action against the state over the Probable Cause Affidavit. But why Miami? The phrase 'reinstate this action' also seems more consistent with the first hypothesis.

I could be wrong, but it sounds like more frivolous motions to me. The language sounds to me more like pseudo-legalese than an actual motion. In fact, it sounds almost like random strings of legal terms generated using a Markov chain. "Amend the House of Representative"? What's that supposed to mean?

Also, why would the defense team want to transfer the action to the Miami-Dade district? That seems more like something an unhinged Traybot would propose, so that TM would get justice from his peers instead of the heavily-white Sanford-area jury pool.

Also, why would the defense team want to transfer the action to the Miami-Dade district? That seems more like something an unhinged Traybot would propose, so that TM would get justice from his peers instead of the heavily-white Sanford-area jury pool.

After I figure that out, I'll try to decipher, "IN COMPLIANCE TO THE RULES OF DISTRICT COURT CREDIBLE ARGUMENT WITH PERMISSION TO ADVISEMENT FAMILY." I suspect whoever filed it has trouble with language in general, not just legal language. Heck, if I'd known the court accepted any old thing dropped over the transom, I might have submitted a few myself, just as a lark.

The motions (I use the term loosely) are now posted on court's Zimmerman webpage. They're filed by a Mr. Kevin Fennick. They're filed pro se -- hard as it may be to believe the finely-crafted legal arguments are from a non-attorney, not from an ivy league law professor.

The motions (I use the term loosely) are now posted on court's Zimmerman webpage. They're filed by a Mr. Kevin Fennick.

Thanks.

Mr. Fennick describes himself as 'Former member of Guardian Angels Boston Chapter' (Motion to Reinstate, p. 1). He thoughtfully provides the court what appears to be a copy of the national organization's homepage, offering opportunities to donate and to 'Shop Guardian Angels Gear', several credit cards accepted (p. 3).

I see these post trial motions as about par for the case actually. The apparent bar for legal matters in this case has been down in the sub-flooring from the beginning. I expect the case will be best remembered in the judicial world as a bad example not to be followed, particularly for high visibility cases.

I think the judges were run roughshod by the prosecution, without the Wisdom of Solomon apparent from either judge. The only memorable line from the judge that comes to mind was something about “the prosecution has a strong case” by Judge Lester, to be used in a mocking fashion after the outcome.

The judge is supposed to be protecting the defendant’s rights, and I didn’t see that apparent in this case. I think a wiser choice by Judge Lester would have been to refer the matter to the grand jury at the time of the APC, though I don’t specifically know that is legally possible. Findings for arrest by a grand jury would have created a much more believable process, though I personally doubt they would have returned an indictment. Grand jury presentations by the Fulton-Martin family members would have clarified their statements earlier. I suspect that more of TM’s history would have been revealed in front of a grand jury than the trial. The personage of W8/RJ and her statements would have been locked down much earlier. Grand jury action would have assisted in managing the PR issues in the case, and minimized some of the influence by Crump et al in the media. The answer to “why wasn’t GZ arrested” would have been “the grand jury did not provide an indictment”.

While Judge Nelson made many favorable decisions for the prosecution in my opinion, I see the only difficult choice she made supporting the defense was the Frye Ruling on the prosecution’s voice “experts”. I expected some embarrassment when the FBI speech expert said those “experts” were bogus in front of the jury.

I don’t know how the judicial ethics sort out on such matters, but Judge Nelson does not seem to have rushed out for the speaking circuit, and I don’t expect a big book deal for her either.

EMERGENCY MOTION TO AMEND JEB BUSH IN ASSOCIATION WITH PERSON OF INTEREST IN ALL COMPLIANCE TO THE RULES OF COURT IN REGARDS TO THE OPERATIONS OF COMMONWEALTH HERBERT WALKER BUSH CORRESPONDANCE ON BEHALF OF TRAYVON MARTIN CIVIL COVER SHEET